Brad Guth wrote:
"Brad Guth" wrote in message
news:ea7904dcf9cf8a9fd7a4e4d97da058f4.49644@mygate .mailgate.org

Using salty and otherwise icy moons to transfer life as we know it. Why
not?

Lithopanspermia and you

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.s...d4bf86bb57cb6e

http://mygate.mailgate.org/mynews/sc...ma ilgate.org

I have no problems with the likes of multi teratonne litho transfers of
minerals, salty ice and life as we know it, even if such opportunities
having been intentionally taken advantage of by ETs having a master
plan.

"Microbe experiment suggests we could all be Martians" sounds perfectly
doable.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/st...989431,00.html
"To their surprise, the scientists found the lichen and bacterial spores
survived all but the most cataclysmic impacts up to 45 billion pascals.
The cyanobacteria survived shocks of up to 10 billion pascals."

Just to honestly think a little outside the box; If much larger life as
we know it were surrounded or otherwise covered by 100 km of salty ice,
whereas a Buick and passengers within could easily have survived the
transfer, especially if such were of a sucker-punch glancung blow from
behind, in which case you wouldn't even require the Buick.

"Rusty" wrote in message
oups.com
Interesting theory, but Earth with its oceans, undersea smokers,
lightning, volcanos, etc etc etc wouldn't seem to have had any trouble
forming life locally. You would think it would be the reverse and earth
may have seeded life to Mars by this method.

Lithopanspermia seems perfectly doable. After all, Earth's life was
almost entirely litho transfer based, if not intentionally terraformed
by way of ET-4H clubs in order to suit their motives and whatever weird
agenda.

Life going from Earth outward via some cosmic happenstance is a bit of a
stretch, though possible since we seem to get a few spores from Venus
each and very 19 month cycle.

Was our sun and of its solar wind more active in the past? (I'd thought
it was usually the other way around).

When did Earth get its salty oceans, its seasonal tilt, its Arctic ocean
basin and its moon that's more than a thousand fold by ratio bigger
and/or more massive by ratio than any other known moon?

Why are there intelligent human records from the end of, while during
and even a few from before the last ice age that simply fail to mention
or otherwise take into consideration that nifty GW(global warming) moon
of ours?

Why is there no verifiable hard science of Earth's environment having
that seasonal tilt or moon prior to 10,000 BC, if not a bit more recent?

Why was early/proto human life on Earth so monoseason (w/o
summer/winter)?

Why did early/proto Venus have a beard?

Why is our extremely unusual moon still so salty?

An even better question is; Why is my "Earth w/o Magnetosphere, w/o
Moon" topic excluded/banished from within the rec.org.mensa
Mailgate/Usenet index?
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG




It is far from impossible that planetary bodies do, from time to time,
collide. That Mars, Venus, and Earth, may have collided in the past is
very, very possible -- even probable.

Such collisions could come about in our very early history and have
helped determine the size of the orbs, or they may have come about more
recently and have 'glanced' off each other because of the lubricant
effect of their atmospheres.

Such 'glancing' blows could easily have taken place with the last eon
or so. While a 'glancing' blow might not result in planetary
destruction it could rip an atmosphere from a smaller orb or cause
cataclysmic spin and tilt. Come to think of it, the Earth is a little
tilted. And, Earth also has a lot of water, almost too much water if
you know what I mean. And, Mars has almost no atmosphere or water
either one.

Mars is, of course, the smaller of the two bodies and gravity would
take from the smaller and give to the larger. God is playing billiards
again, I guess.


tomcat